(Original post by Erebus)
Corrent. I'm just saying that's my personal belief, and I'm afraid nothing will change it. I understand were you are coming from though definately, and I am well grounded in the sciences. I just can't help the way I feel!

Okay, fair enough. But the human mind is very good at deluding itself. Remember that you are looking at the world in a very subjective and biased way.

(Original post by Erebus)Angers you? Have you read previous posts to see where I'm coming from?

I'm afraid you've just made a total blanket statement, without any reasons, could you ellucidate your opinion. And perhaps we can this continue debate from there.

Yes, otherwise I wouldn't have commented on them.

"The only reason I said myself that the existence of a higher power cannot be dismissed is because there are so many things we will never ever understand and perhaps that could be the answer, "

It just isn't true: just because we have gaps in our current knowledge doesn't mean we won't know them in the future. Most probably, in the future (i.e. in around 150 years) we will know everything about our universe.

To say that God is the answer just raises as many questions as it allegedly solves. Science, not theology, is the correct way to go about answering such questions. To speculate and to put it down to God, agreed, perhaps could be the answer. It probably isn't, though.

(Original post by Erebus)
I never even said that it implies the existence of a higher power. I said that I personally believe that. I believe there must be some sort of higher power because there's always going to be unaswerable questions... limits do exist on what we, as human beings, can know. And usually a discovery brings up even more questions. I think lifes easier if you just get on with it and it is my personal belief that there is some higher power (this could be to do with my fear of death).

We have a gap praiser: you believe that because we don't know some things, God by default must be the answer.

I can't be bothered to even argue this point, it is futile and I hope you will adjust your stance on this topic.

(Original post by Speedbird2008)Yes, otherwise I wouldn't have commented on them.

"The only reason I said myself that the existence of a higher power cannot be dismissed is because there are so many things we will never ever understand and perhaps that could be the answer, "

It just isn't true: just because we have gaps in our current knowledge doesn't mean we won't know them in the future. Most probably, in the future (i.e. in around 150 years) we will know everything about our universe.

To say that God is the answer just raises as many questions as it allegedly solves. Science, not theology, is the correct way to go about answering such questions. To speculate and to put it down to God, agreed, perhaps could be the answer. It probably isn't, though.

Firstly we already know of physical limitations such as the Heinsenberg Principle. Limititations like this are considered fundamental aspects of the unviserse. Therefore there WILL be things we can never hope to know.

Secondly, you totally make the wrong assumption. Believing in a higher power doesn't constitute a belief in God. In fact that's as far from my belief as it could be. I envisage a higher power as something totally un-godlike, and more like a force or an energy. But all said and done, that's just what I feel, we all have opinions, but I think my opinion is a fair one, and yet you are acting like it's ludicrous.

150 years we will know everything? LOL. Have you built a time machine and checked to see if you are right? You seem pretty sure.

(Original post by Erebus)
Firstly we already know of physical limitations such as the Heinsenberg Principle. Limititations like this are considered fundamental aspects of the unviserse. Therefore there WILL be things we can never hope to know. The Heisenburg principle is generally regarded as ********: it just dissuades research. To say that there are limitations to our knowledge is just stupid, the more you read around physics for example, the more you realise how improbable a God is.

Secondly, you totally make the wrong assumption. Believing in a higher power doesn't constitute a belief in God. In fact that's as far from my belief as it could be. I envisage a higher power as something totally un-godlike, and more like a force or an energy. But all said and done, that's just what I feel, we all have opinions, but I think my opinion is a fair one, and yet you are acting like it's ludicrous. Ahh, well you are talking about the Einsteinian God. Either way, it is superhuman or superhuman: for a normal argument, God will suffice. And also, the "God Particle" as it is dubbed is trying to be found by CERN at the LHC. Your beliefs will hopefully be proven correct.

150 years we will know everything? LOL. Have you built a time machine and checked to see if you are right? You seem pretty sure. Hmm, that just reduces the argument. Anyway, if you look at the amount of knowledge have gained this century, to extrapolate it by 150 years, we will probably know (okay, almost) everything about the universe. Probably.

God will not suffice because it's totally different to what I mean, and as you are refusing to let this go, I at least what you to understand were I am coming from (because I understand and appreciate your point of view).

The God particle as you so aptly said is trying to be found. But for me, a particle that simply proves the theoretical higgs mechanism does not constitute a higher power.

Instead hypothesis regarding the big bang, speculating that all the known forces were once one single force, insinuate a higher power. Again not in the way you are interpreting. I don't believe in God, Allah or whatever. I don't even believe in some sort of other "God" that requires any personification. Anyway as I was saying, this speculated one single force could consitute, for me, a higher power. By higher power, I don't mean some sort of omniscient figure in the Heavens. I mean, a physical property that our universe has, and is responsible for our existence.

I am a committed Christian I don't think it's so much about belief as knowledge that God exists. I think iof you want proof then your conscience is the answer, because having a coscience is a pretty irrational and sometimes impractical thing to have and yet (hopefully) we all follow it or know it is there etc...Ok you can say that we are socially conditioned or something but there's no scientific explannation for a conscience. Also, everything in the bible is for the good of mankind and focusses on love and then there's the Pascal argument.

There are weird bits in the Bible (esp. old T.) but they have to be viewwed in mind to their context, eg circumcision prevents diseases/infection in whatever year BC.

Most of this has probs already been said but hopefully it's vaguely enlightening xxx

Yo both of you, OK not a scientidt but even if we do come to the knowledege surely we can never fully comprehend the universe anyway because it's literally too big for our brains, what i mean is we're limited to 3D whereas it's 7D or something and we can't get our heads around that, we know it but we can't comprehend it properly because it's beyond our mental capacity. I'm probably barking up completely wrong tree but just a thought???

(Original post by Persephone, wife to Hades)
There are weird bits in the Bible (esp. old T.) but they have to be viewwed in mind to their context, eg circumcision prevents diseases/infection in whatever year BC. Pick and choose to shape modern day morality... standard.

Most of this has probs already been said but hopefully it's vaguely enlightening xxx No it is not enlightening, it is mildy amusing.

Lemme' take apart this bit you wrote:

(Original post by You)
I am a committed Christian I don't think it's so much about belief as knowledge that God exists. That is just arrogant. Very few atheists would 100% deny the existence of God, very few theists such as yourself would just say outright that a God exists. The point remains: there is no evidece for a deity, and "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

I think if you want proof then your conscience is the answer, because having a coscience is a pretty irrational and sometimes impractical thing to have and yet (hopefully) we all follow it or know it is there etc... Sometimes arguments are so futile that they are not worth answering. This is an example. How on Earth does having a mind = the existence of a deity?! Our minds are easily explainable by both neuroscience and evolution. But then again, Christians are vehemently opposed to modern day science and anything which may go to harm their religion.

Ok you can say that we are socially conditioned or something but there's no scientific explannation for a conscience. Err, neourotransmitters? Neuro receptors? Blimey, i have only done A2 Level Biology, yet it is so easily explainable... even though the mechanism is very complicated. Again, HOW DOES HAVING A CONSCIENCE PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF A DEITY?Also, everything in the bible is for the good of mankind and focusses on love and then there's the Pascal argument. Pascal's Wager is such a load of ********. You cannot just "decide to believe in something". Plus, why would you want to believe in a deity? It is devisive, dangerous and prevents scientific and personal advancement.

And finally, I agree with you that "everything" in the Bible is "for the good of makind and focuses on love." My hand is raised for the stoning of those who commit adultery, those who cheek their parents, kill those who are homosexual, burn those who "play the whore", to name a very few. Woo, go peaceful Christianity!

(Original post by Persephone, wife to Hades)
Yo both of you, OK not a scientidt but even if we do come to the knowledege surely we can never fully comprehend the universe anyway because it's literally too big for our brains, what i mean is we're limited to 3D whereas it's 7D or something and we can't get our heads around that, we know it but we can't comprehend it properly because it's beyond our mental capacity. That is just a poor argument. We will one day comprehend it. To take that stance is thoroughly pointless and doesn't do anything for the good of humanity, other than to dissuade research. I'm probably barking up completely wrong tree but just a thought???

(Original post by Erebus)
Firstly we already know of physical limitations such as the Heinsenberg Principle. Limititations like this are considered fundamental aspects of the unviserse. Therefore there WILL be things we can never hope to know.

Secondly, you totally make the wrong assumption. Believing in a higher power doesn't constitute a belief in God. In fact that's as far from my belief as it could be. I envisage a higher power as something totally un-godlike, and more like a force or an energy. But all said and done, that's just what I feel, we all have opinions, but I think my opinion is a fair one, and yet you are acting like it's ludicrous.

150 years we will know everything? LOL. Have you built a time machine and checked to see if you are right? You seem pretty sure.

This sounds like Pantheism to me which, as Dawkins says, is practically just, "sexed up atheism."

(Original post by Melancholy)
I'll remind posters that spamming this thread with off-topic or one word comments will be treated as a serious breach of the rules. I've had to remove some posts and I really don't want to have to warn people. For clarity, this thread is intended to soak up the generic debates regarding the subject of whether God exists.

Ludwig, absolute legend (Y) good choice. I particularly like his 'first stage' of philosophy, his no-nonsense approach to philosophy would probably assert what...we don't really know what God is, so we can never prove that God exists, therefore it's meaningless to try and figure it out.

(Original post by Soz1)
Instead of debating, wouldn't it be easier just to wait for the evidence of God's existence to turn up, and then have a discussion about it?

Lol, just wait? evidence doesn't POP up out of no where. The good thing about debates is you gain an insight into another point of view, and increase your overall understanding of something. THEN once this happens, you may be able to contribute your own two cents, and bingo we may be THAT bit more closer to an answer